Legal Opinion

Erwin v. Bryan

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 25, 2010No. 2009-0580PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Donnell, J.

{¶ 1} Civ.R. 15(D) provides that when a plaintiff does not know the name of a defendant, the defendant may be designated in a complaint by any name and description. It also provides, however, that a plaintiff must aver in the complaint that the name of the defendant could not be discovered, that the summons issued must contain the words “name unknown,” and that a copy of the summons must be personally served on the defendant.

{¶ 2} Civ.R. 15(D) cannot be used to prosecute this action against William V. Swoger, D.O., and his professional corporation, Union Internal Medicine Specialties, Inc.…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Chase Securities Corp. v. DonaldsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Flowers v. WalkerOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Fletcher v. University HospitalsOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Cundall v. U.S. BankOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Proctor v. KardassilarisOhio Supreme Court · 2007

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Rashoun Smith v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
  2. State v. Boaston (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  3. Ludwigsen v. Lakeside Plaza, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
  4. State Ex Rel. Fifth Third Mortgage Co. v. RussoOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  5. State ex rel. Vindicator Printing Co. v. WolffOhio Supreme Court · 2012

51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API